Updated: January 14, 2026
Secret diplomacy, covert operations, espionage and spies were the hidden forces of the Patriots. So without its secret committees, the American Revolution might never have succeeded. In this post, we explore three reasons for secrecy and examine the roles of the Secret Committee and the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
American Revolution Secret Committees: Hidden Forces of the Revolutionary War
Before discussing the secret committees of the American Revolution, it is important to understand the three distinct—but interconnected—reasons for secrecy. These were especially in the early months of the conflict.
Treason
One reason—perhaps not the foremost—secrecy was important to the American Patriots was to avoid creating a record that could implicate them in treason.
Consider the following timeline.
On April 19, 1775, the American colonists confronted the British government in open armed conflict. But as Dr. Robert A Gross explains in our program (our interview will publish soon), the Americans who took up arms in the Battles of Lexington and Concord on that famous day—the “shot heard round the world”—were not thinking about independence. They were defending what they believed were their constitutional rights as British subjects.
Even well into early 1776—around the time of the British evacuation of Boston on March 17—independence was still far from inevitable. For example, as Prof. Harvey J. Kaye explains during our interview (to be published soon), General George Washington and his officers were still toasting King George III.
My purpose in presenting the above point is to highlight an aspect of the American Revolution that most of us more or less overlook when we review this history: that from April 19, 1775, to July 4, 1776, American colonists were unequivocally British subjects. Hence, all Americans who actively opposed British authority—military or political—in the American colonies were, in essence, committing acts of treason.
Think of this in the context of 1775-76, when winning the Revolutionary War against the might of the British Empire was far from certain. If the American rebels had lost, what would have happened to all those who actively helped the American cause – a rebellion from the British perspective?
Many Americans could be tried for treason.
In our program, Prof. Carlton F.W. Larson discusses the history of treason in the context of the American Revolution. He is the author of The Trials of Allegiance: Treason, Juries, and the American Revolution, and my interview with him will publish soon.
Aside from losing the war, reconciliation was another potential scenario. In fact, as Prof. Joel Richard Paul explains in Unlikely Allies, a book that we discuss in , in early 1778 the American commissioners in Paris, including Benjamin Franklin, seriously contemplated negotiating with the British for some sort of reconciliation.
As a reminder, this was before the all-important American victory at the Battle of Saratoga (thanks to Benedict Arnold). This was when both the French and Spanish governments continued to refuse any alliance or treaty of commerce with the Americans. And this was when the British still occupied American Patriots’ capital – Philadelphia.
Had reconciliation been the Revolution’s end, what would have become of those who openly opposed British rule?
Even if Patriot leaders avoided treason trials, many might have found themselves barred from prospering within the restored British imperial system.
France
Another reason for secrecy was France.
After the Seven Years’ War ended in 1763, France’s military and geopolitical position weakened significantly compared to Britain. The Treaty of Paris imposed harsh terms, including restrictions on France’s ability to support armed conflicts against Britain.
Yet American representatives—Silas Deane, and soon after Benjamin Franklin—were actively seeking French support for their rebellion. This put France in an awkward, embarrassing and outright dangerous position.
On several occasions, the British ambassador to France, Lord Stormont, confronted the French Foreign Minister, comte de Vergennes, and warned him that France’s support of the American Revolution was a gross violation of the 1763 Treaty and would lead to open war with Britain.
As Prof. Paul recounts in Unlikely Allies, when Stormont uncovered signs of French assistance—supplies being prepared, American privateers entering French ports—Louis XVI was embarrassed and forced to temporarily halt shipments and detain privateers and their prizes.
In such an environment, secrecy protected France as much as it protected America.
The War
The third reason for secrecy is the one most familiar to us: the secrecy required for military operations.
Naturally, Patriots did not want British officials—or Loyalists within the colonies—to learn about their troop movements, supply shortages, diplomatic strategies, or hidden alliances.
Let me digress for a moment and share some shocking anecdotes that highlight just how crucial secrecy was.
In 1777, the principal American representatives in France were Silas Deane, Arthur Lee, and Benjamin Franklin. Secrecy was absolutely crucial to their success—but ironically, it was also one of their biggest challenges.
Consider the following shocking examples, which I discuss more with Prof. Paul in our interview:
Edward Bancroft was Deane’s personal secretary. He was a former pupil of Deane, and was recommended for this position by none other than Franklin. Yet, Bancroft was a British spy!
His British code name was “Dr. Edward Edwards”, and it was known that he was having an illicit love affair, in the course of which he would send romantic letters to his lover.
But Bancroft wasn’t in love with anyone—at least, not in this case!
The love affair was a cover. In between the amorous lines to his supposed lover, Bancroft wrote Americans’ secrets in invisible ink and passed it to the British.
As for Lee, he criticized Deane’s diplomatic work in France, including what he saw as lapses in secrecy. Yet, Lee’s own trusted and devoted secretary, John Thornton, was a British agent!
Given these constant challenges—legal, diplomatic, and military—it’s no wonder the Patriots established special committees to handle covert communications and sensitive operations.
These two committees—the Secret Committee and the Committee of Secret Correspondence—performed crucial, though mostly forgotten, roles in the Revolution.
The Secret Committee: Supplying the Revolutionary War
The American colonies lacked a warmaking industrial base. In fact, it was way more than that. The American colonies virtually lacked any manufacturing base. This was predominantly due to Britain’s mercantilist policy which ensured that the colonies remained dependent on imports.
This created an immediate crisis:
How do you fight a war if you cannot produce muskets, gunpowder, bayonets, cannons, ammunition, uniforms, shoes, tents, or even the cloth to make them?
You import them.
So on September 18, 1775, the Second Continental Congress established the Secret Committee (it might have initially been called the Committee of Secrecy). Its mission—supplying the Continental Army—was simple in concept but impossibly complex in execution: securing weapons, ammunition, and equipment from Europe despite a British naval blockade and without formal recognition from foreign governments.
It was one of the most difficult logistical undertakings of the entire Revolution.
The Committee of Secret Correspondence: Diplomacy and Espionage
The Committee of Secret Correspondence was established on November 29, 1775 – two months after the Secret Committee.
Its purpose was not to arm the Revolution, but to win allies and gather intelligence.
This committee coordinated secret communications with foreign governments, arranged covert financing, cultivated French, Dutch, and Spanish support, and oversaw intelligence operations. In effect, they served as both the diplomatic corps and the espionage service of the Revolution.
Their work ensured that the American cause—and the possibility of independence—was taken seriously in European capitals.
It should be noted that the Committee of Secret Correspondence was distinct from the Committees of Correspondence, which did not operate within the framework of the Continental Congress and were largely dissolved by 1776.
Overlapping Committee Members
As Prof. Paul describes in Unlikely Allies, overlapping memberships and missions caused confusion and combined responsibilities for both the Secret Committee and the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
For example, Benjamin Franklin and John Dickinson were members of both committees. And Silas Deane was receiving instructions essentially from members of both committees on (1) procuring supplies for the Revolutionary War, and (2) cultivating European political recognition.
It’s easy to see how these tasks could and did overlap.
How The Two Committees Differed
While the missions and operations of Secret Committee and the Committee of Secret Correspondence overlapped – because indeed they were complementary, they were, nevertheless, distinct committees.
- The Secret Committee handled logistics and domestic procurement. Their work was about ensuring the Continental Army had the supplies it needed to fight.
- The Committee of Secret Correspondence handled foreign diplomacy and intelligence. Their work involved building alliances, gathering intelligence, and coordinating support beyond the American colonies.
Together, these committees represented a sophisticated approach to revolutionary strategy—one that combined material readiness with international diplomacy. Without their efforts, the Revolution might have faltered long before it achieved independence.
What Happened to These Secret Committees
By July 1777, the Secret Committee was, for all intents and purposes, absorbed by the Committee of Secret Correspondence and renamed as the Committee of Commerce. From the above discussion of overlapping personnel and responsibilities, it is not a leap to understand why the Secret Committee would merge with the Committee of Secret Correspondence.
As for the Committee of Secret Correspondence, on April 17, 1777, it was renamed the Committee of Foreign Affairs – a title more fitting for its diplomatic responsibilities.
The Legacy of the American Revolution Secret Committees
The work of these committees laid the foundation for modern American intelligence and diplomatic efforts.
On March 1, 1781, the Second Continental Congress transitioned into the Congress of the Confederation, which operated under the Articles of Confederation. Along with this transition, on July 27, 1781, the Committee of Foreign Affairs evolved into the permanent Department of Foreign Affairs, with its office of the Secretary of Foreign Affairs.
As the Articles of Confederation gave way to the U.S. Constitution, the First U.S. Congress approved the reestablishment of the Department of Foreign Affairs as the first agency in the new federal government of the United States— the Department of State.
About Featured Image
Pictured from left to right are Arthur Lee, Benjamin Franklin and Silas Deane. All images are in the Public Domain.
Coming in 2026: posts that dive into the hidden stories behind these portraits, including the unexpected lives of their artists.
About This Program
Analyzing American Revolution (AAR) is a special series podcast production of the History Behind News program. In this series, 33 professors (and counting) analyze the American Revolution from 33 different angles through in-depth interviews with host Adel Aali.
Tap here for a closer look at the Revolutionary Era topics we examine—and to meet our guest scholars.
Visit our Revolutionary Era Blog page for
- Interview Transcript Highlights
- Interview Image and Artist Highlights
- Quiz Answers and Backstories
Images of American Revolution
Explore the backstories and artist bios of the images in our introductory video. For example, did you know that the Peale family—father, uncle, and son—painted George Washington both in rare sittings and later from memory?
Experienced Analysis of History
About HbN Program:
The History Behind News program (HbN) is committed to making in-depth history researched and written by scholars enjoyable and accessible to everyone. Our motto is bridging scholarly works to everyday news.
The histories we’ve uncovered encompass an impressively wide range of subjects from ancient history to U.S. politics and economy to race, women’s rights, immigration, climate, science, military, war, China, Europe, Middle East, Russia & Ukraine, Africa and the Americas to many other issues in the news. We also receive advanced copies of scholarly books and discuss them in our program (in the context of current news).
197 Scholars & Counting:
Our guests are scholars in prestigious institutions, such as Oxford, Yale, Caltech, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, the Hoover Institution, the American Enterprise Institute, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, King’s College London, Princeton University, Notre Dame, Dartmouth College, Columbia University, the Atlantic Council, Duke, Amherst College, University of Michigan, Rhodes College, Emory University, Northwestern Law, Vanderbilt University, US Naval War College, Air Command and Staff College, Marine Corp University, UVA, Johns Hopkins, Cornell, NYU, Rice, University of Chicago, White House Historical Association, Baylor University, USC, UC Berkeley, UCSF, UCI, UCSD, UC Davis, UCR, Tel Aviv University, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the Israel Democracy Institute, University of Aberdeen, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, University of Navarra, University of Seville, Helsinki University, Diego Portales University (Chile), Lund University (Sweden), University of Edinburgh, Near East University (Türkiye), Cardiff University, the Free University of Berlin and many others.
They include Pulitzer Prize winners, renowned documentary producers, former White House advisors and other high-ranking government officials, and current and former senior reporters at The Wall Street Journal and New York Times Magazine. Many have testified in Congressional hearings and others frequently contribute to major media outlets and widely read publications, ranging from the BBC, NPR, PBS and MSNBC to The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.
Think You Know the American Revolution?
